Court Service: Performance Targets

Lord Mackenzie of Framwellgate: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the key performance targets for the Court Service Executive Agency for 2000-01.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: The following table sets out the key performance targets that I have set for the Court Service for 2000-01.
	
		
			  Performance Indicator Target 2000-01 
			 KPI 1 The quality of service provided to court users 85% 
			 KPI 2 The percentage of administrative work in the civil courts processed within target time 94% 
			 KPI 3 The percentage of Crown Court cases that commence within target 78% 
			 KPI 4 Average waiting time for asylum appeals from receipt at the Immigration Appellate Authority to promulgation of the Adjudicator's decision 16 weeks 
			 KPI 5 The percentage of the cost of the civil courts recovered through fees 94%

Federal Republic of Yugoslavia: Sanctions

Baroness Rawlings: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will clarify what Baroness Scotland of Asthal meant by "smart sanctions" in her Answer on 20 April.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The term "smart sanctions" refers to the EU's wish to target sanctions so that, as far as possible, they affect the Milosevic regime and those closely associated with it rather than the ordinary people of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

Federal Republic of Yugoslavia: Sanctions

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the procedures for monitoring the detailed effects of mandatory sanctions on Serbia under the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1160, and any other relevant resolutions, and how often monitoring takes place; and who assesses the impact of similar European Union voluntary measures and how.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: UN Security Council Resolution 1160 (1998) imposed an embargo on the supply of arms and related material to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and a ban on arming and training for terrorist activities there. SCRs 1203 and 1244 allow supplies to the verification missions and the international civil and security presences respectively. UN member states are responsible for implementing and enforcing these sanctions. Resolution 1160 established a UN committee which is tasked with, inter alia, seeking information from all member states regarding action taken by them to implement the sanctions and to consider information brought to its attention by any state concerning violations of the prohibitions and to recommend appropriate measures thereto.
	The European Union has a series of measures in place against the FRY. These impose mandatory obligations on EU member states and include appropriate exemptions on humanitarian grounds and for Kosovo and Montenegro. EU member states are responsible for enforcing these measures. The General Affairs Council of the European Union regularly reviews EU policy towards the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. At the General Affairs Council of 14 February EU Foreign Ministers agreed to tighten financial sanctions and at the same time suspend the EU flight ban for six months.

FCO Communications System

Lord Grenfell: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to modernise the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's communications systems.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office signed a contract on 10 May 2000 with Global Crossing to provide a new telecommunications network and associated telecommunications services. The contract has been negotiated as part of the private finance initiative, and will run for a 10-year period. The projected net present value of the contract is £106 million. The total cost of the contract over the 10-year period is projected at £165 million.

NATO Parliamentary Assembly

Lord Hughes of Woodside: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What changes have been made in the composition of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The noble Lord, Lord Sewel, has replaced the noble Lord, Lord Kennet, as a member of the delegation.

E-envoy Website

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	With what frequency the e-envoy pages of the e-envoy's website are updated.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The purpose of the e-envoy forum is to allow users to enter into a debate about appropriate matters. The pages are not therefore "updated" except by users. The e-forum was launched, together with the e-envoy's website, on 18 January. It was re-designed and relaunched on 5 April.

Trident Programme: Cost

Baroness Serota: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the latest estimate of the cost of the Trident acquisition programme.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The current estimate of the total acquisition cost of the Trident programme, with payments already made expressed at the prices and exchange rates actually incurred and future spend at the current financial year exchange rate (the hybrid estimate), is now £9,745 million. Leaving aside the effects of price inflation (+£12 million), there has been a real cost reduction since last year of £23 million. Expenditure on the Trident acquisition programme to 30 September 1999 represented some 96 per cent of this estimate. If all expenditure, past and projected, is brought up to the current year's economic conditions (the non-hybrid estimate) the estimate is £13,170 million.
	
		
			£ million 
			  US UK Total 
			 Estimate Table (hybrid) 
			 Previous estimate (April 1999) at  1998-99 economic conditions  (£1 = $1.6269) 2,873 6,883 9,756 
			 Real changes -16 -7 -23 
			 Price inflation on unspent balance +2 +10 +12 
			 Exchange rate variation 0 n/a 0 
			 Revised estimate at 1999-2000  economic conditions  (£1 = $1.6269) 2,859 6,886 9,745 
			 Estimate Table (non-hybrid) 
			 Previous estimate (April 1999) at  1998-99 economic conditions  (£1 = $1.6269) 3,448 9,423 12,870 
			 Real changes -16 -7 -23 
			 Price inflation on unspent balance +64 +258 +323 
			 Exchange rate variation 0 n/a 0 
			 Revised estimate at 1999-2000  economic conditions  (£1 = $1.6269) 3,496 9,674 13,170 
		
	
	Note:
	Figures rounded to nearest £ million, hence any apparent imbalances.

Decommissioned Nuclear-Powered Submarines

Lord Hughes of Woodside: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made on the study into options for the storage of decommissioned nuclear submarines; and whether they will make a statement.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We announced in March 1998 that we would undertake a study into options for the storage of decommissioned nuclear-powered submarines. The initial phase of our study has been completed. We have concluded that while afloat storage would remain a safe option, if suitable alternative venues could be identified land storage offers the best overall solution in the long term. Further work will now be undertaken to determine which land storage option should be adopted. We expect this further work to take up to three years to complete.
	The purpose of the next phase will be to determine which land storage solution should be adopted. This work will be taken forward in conjunction with industry, which will be invited to submit their proposals with a view to entering into a public private partnership arrangement. As part of the process, we will further develop one land storage option, the removal and storage of the intact reactor compartment and the recycling of the remainder of the submarine, as a basis for comparison with industry proposals. We have not identified specific land store sites but would expect these to emerge from the proposals we receive from industry. No decision will be taken on the most suitable storage option or on a site until we have completed the next phase of the study, which will include full and open consultation. As part of this process, environmental impact assessments will be undertaken for each storage option taken forward.
	We are providing oral briefings to interested parties and the media and material is also available on the MoD website. In addition, we are inviting written comments as a means of shaping and informing our further work and plan to consult widely during the next phase of the study.
	Separately, and in parallel, we have received an unsolicited commercial proposal from Babcock Rosyth Defence Limited, the owners of Rosyth Royal Dockyard, to dismantle the reactor compartment of one decommissioned nuclear submarine, HMS Renown and store the components. This would be an alternative to the traditional nuclear decommissioning work planned to start at Rosyth later this year and would not lead to any overall increase in the radioactive waste already held there. The intermediate level waste from Renown would be held initially in the purpose built facility at Rosyth, but BRDL has been asked to make proposals for its eventual removal.
	The Babcock proposal will be taken forward in two stages and we have agreed that the first, which will involve feasibility and planning work only, may proceed. There will be no question of moving to the second, implementation stage of the proposal until and unless we and the relevant regulatory authorities are entirely satisfied. In these circumstances we will make a further announcement.
	During the second stage, we will work with Babcock to produce an environmental impact assessment which will involve public consultation. In addition, the company will have to satisfy the nuclear safety and environmental requirements of the independent regulators, including the Nuclear Installations inspectorate and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, before the dismantling work can begin. The company will be briefing local interest groups and the media tomorrow.
	In all of the above, safety remains of paramount importance and we will work to the same standards that apply to civil nuclear industry.

Antibiotic Resistance and Communicable Disease Surveillance: PHLS Grant

Lord Walton of Detchant: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will now review their grant to the Public Health Laboratory Service in relation to the growing problem of antibiotic resistance and communicable disease surveillance.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: Officials are discussing with the Public Health Laboratory Service what work needs to be done in this area, bearing in mind the antibiotic resistance strategy and the communicable disease strategy currently being developed and how it might be funded.

Child Abuse: Appointments to Departmental Advisory Groups

Baroness Blatch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in the light of the report of a child abuse scandal in the Evening Standard on 12 April, they consider that the procedures for vetting and appointing those persons responsible for giving advice on matters such as child adoption are sufficiently robust.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: Individuals are invited to become members of departmental advisory groups because their expertise and experience are considered to be sufficiently wide and relevant to enable them to make an effective contribution to the particular study. Many appointees to such committees are already known to the department and hold senior positions in their respective fields as practitioners, senior managers, academics etc. However, those members whose work includes substantial contact with children will have been subject to police and other employment checks. Since therefore their appointment to an advisory group is made with the support of employers, it is unlikely that an employer would agree an appointment where they had concerns about an individual's suitability. An appointment would not be countenanced by the department where information about a candidate could compromise its work, nor, should any information come to light after the appointment is made, would an individual remain an adviser to the department.

Modernising Agenda for the Economy

Lord Patten: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 13 April (WA 58), what is their modernising agenda for the economy, and what is distinctively modern about it.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Government's modernising agenda was summarised in my previous Written Answer. It has been set out in more depth in the White Paper Our Competitive Future: Building the Knowledge Driven Economy (Cmnd 4176) and other White Papers and consultation documents produced by DTI and in Budget and pre-Budget report documentation produced by my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
	Central to this agenda is providing a commercial framework which will help British business compete against the challenges of the future, whether these come from rising consumer expectations, the increasing knowledge content of products and services or the developments of electronic commerce. We believe it is distinctively modern to be at the forefront of the world in developing legislation and other programmes to promote the best environment for electronic commerce, to introduce a regulatory framework which actively promotes the development of fair and effective competition throughout the economy, to be developing a modern framework of company law suited to the needs of this century and actively to promote innovative business clusters and corporate social responsibility. These are just a few examples of issues which this Government are pursuing to help British business meet the demands of the modern knowledge economy.

Act of Union Bicentenary: Post Office Decision on Stamp Issue

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord McIntosh of Haringey of 19 April (WA 107) whether they will invite the Post Office to explain the use of the word "competitors"; and whether the Post Office has evidence that post offices of other countries may be interested in marking by special stamp issue the bicentenary in 2001 of the creation of the United Kingdom.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Post Office advises me that it is in competition for the custom of collectors with other stamp issuers, mints and other producers of memorabilia/collectibles both in the United Kingdom and overseas. The Post Office does not hold information regarding the stamp issues of other countries.

Act of Union Bicentenary: Post Office Decision on Stamp Issue

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 10 April (WA 10), whether they will require the Post Office to list the percentage of the telephone research and in-depth market research carried out among small focus groups, including children, on the topic of further stamp issues which takes place in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland respectively, and what was the cost of such research in 1998.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Stamp Programme is a matter for the Post Office. The Government has no plans to require the Post Office to publish details of their market research.

Act of Union Bicentenary: Post Office Decision on Stamp Issue

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 16 March (WA 220), whether they will invite the Royal Mail to indicate which of the criteria or conventions listed concerning the issue of special stamps caused its decision not to celebrate the bicentenary in 2001 of the creation of the United Kingdom.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Post Office tells me that all of the criteria and conventions were considered in drawing up the 2001 stamp programme. The preferred subjects were selected having regard to these criteria and the conventions that Royal Mail works to, including the Post Office's commercial target for philately.

Trade Balance: Import and Export of Defence Equipment

Lord Jenkins of Putney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	To what extent the United Kingdom's balance of trade is dependent upon the arms trade.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: According to figures published by the Ministry of Defence in UK Defence Statistics 1999, exports of defence equipment in 1998 were worth £3.5 billion, representing 2.1 per cent of total exports of goods. Imports of defence equipment were worth £1.9 billion, accounting for 1.0 per cent of total imports of goods.
	Statistics on trade in defence related services are not available.

Comprehensive and Secondary Modern Schools: GCSE/GNVQ Percentages

Baroness Blatch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in addition to the data published in the Written Answer by Lord Bach on 6 April (WA 151-52), they will publish similar data for:
	(a) the percentage of 15 year-old pupils achieving five or more grades A*-C at GCSE/GNVQ;
	(b) the percentage of 15 year-old pupils achieving one or more grades A*-G at GCSE/GNVQ; and
	(c) the average point score per 15 year-old pupil for: the top 35 per cent of 15 year-old pupils in comprehensive schools; the top 30 per cent of 15 year old pupils in comprehensive schools; all 15 year-old pupils in comprehensive schools; the bottom 75 per cent of 15 year-old pupils in comprehensive schools; the bottom 70 per cent of 15 year-old pupils in comprehensive schools; the bottom 65 per cent of 15 year-old pupils in comprehensive schools; all 15 year-old pupils in secondary modern schools.

Baroness Blackstone: The GCSE/GNVQ performance of 15 year-old pupils in comprehensive schools and secondary modern schools in England, in 1998-99, is shown in the tables.
	Performance of top 35 per cent of pupils in comprehensive schools:
	
		
			 
			  (a) Percentage achieving 5 + grades  A*-C at GCSE/GNVQ 100 per cent  
			  (b) Percentage achieving 1 + grades  A*-G at GCSE/GNVQ 100 per cent  
			  (c) Average point score per 15 year-old  pupil 57.0 points  
		
	
	Performance of top 30 per cent of pupils in comprehensive schools:
	
		
			 
			  (a) Percentage achieving 5 + grades  A*-C at GCSE/GNVQ 100 per cent  
			  (b) Percentage achieving 1 + grades  A*-G at GCSE/GNVQ 100 per cent  
			  (c) Average point score per 15 year-old  pupil 58.8 points  
		
	
	Performance of all 15 year-old pupils in comprehensive schools:
	
		
			 
			  (a) Percentage achieving 5 + grades  A*-C at GCSE/GNVQ 45.0 per cent  
			  (b) Percentage achieving 1 + grades  A*-G at GCSE/GNVQ 95.8 per cent  
			  (c) Average point score per 15 year-old  pupil 37.3 points  Performance of bottom 75 per cent of 15 year-old pupils in comprehensive schools: 
			  (a) Percentage achieving 5 + grades  A*-C at GCSE/GNVQ 27.2 per cent  
			  (b) Percentage achieving 1 + grades  A*-G at GCSE/GNVQ 94.4 per cent  
			  (c) Average point score per 15 year-old  pupil 29.7 points  Performance of bottom 70 per cent of 15 year-old pupils in comprehensive schools: 
			  (a) Percentage achieving 5 + grades  A*-C at GCSE/GNVQ 21.2 per cent  
			  (b) Percentage achieving 1 + grades  A*-G at GCSE/GNVQ 93.9 per cent  
			  (c) Average point score per 15 year-old  pupil 28.0 points  Performance of bottom 65 per cent of 15 year-old pupils in comprehensive schools: 
			  (a) Percentage achieving 5 + grades  A*-C at GCSE/GNVQ 14.5 per cent  
			  (b) Percentage achieving 1 + grades  A*-G at GCSE/GNVQ 93.4 per cent  
			  (c) Average point score per 15 year-old  pupil 26.4 points  Performance of all 15 year-old pupils in secondary modern schools: 
			  (a) Percentage achieving 5 + grades  A*-C at GCSE/GNVQ 32.8 per cent  
			  (b) Percentage achieving 1 + grades  A*-G at GCSE/GNVQ 95.3 per cent  
			  (c) Average point score per 15 year-old  pupil 31.9 points

House of Lords: Right to Regulate its own  Affairs

Lord Campbell of Alloway: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In what areas, and for what reasons, they believe the Royal Prerogative should be asserted over the rights of the House of Lords to regulate its own affairs.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The Government recognise the right of the House of Lords to regulate its own affairs. We believe recommendations from the current study by the Committee on Standards in Public Life will be useful to the House in carrying out that function.

House of Lords' Register of Interests

Lord Campbell of Alloway: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they would oppose an investigation by a committee of the House into the effectiveness of the House of Lords' Register of Interests.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The Committee on Standards in Public Life is looking at standards of conduct in the House of Lords, including the effectiveness of the Register of Interests. If the House wishes to appoint such a committee, it would be better for this to be set up to consider the findings and recommendations of the Committee on Standards in Public Life.

House of Lords' Register of Interests

Lord Campbell of Alloway: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether it is their view that Bishops and Lords of Appeal in Ordinary should be subject to the same requirements to register their interests as other Members of the House.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The Government do not wish to prejudge the recommendations of the inquiry by the Committee on Standards in Public Life, which we believe will cover the issue.

House of Lords' Register of Interests

Lord Campbell of Alloway: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they lack confidence in the House of Lords' register of interests; and, if so, for what reasons.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The Government accept the view of the Committee on Standards in Public Life that the time is right to review the effectiveness of the voluntary register brought in following the Griffiths report. The context of the committee's inquiry is set out in the issues and questions document published by the committee on 4 April.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Mancroft: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider that minutes of meetings of members of the Committee on Standards in Public Life should be published in the interests of openness about decisions they take.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The decision on the publication of minutes of its meetings and of information gained during its inquiries rests with the committee itself in the context of its own commitment to openness as one of the committee's principles of public life.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Mancroft: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any staff attached to the Committee on Standards in Public Life have been engaged in political activity or have been members of a political party within the last 10 years; and what has been the nature of that activity.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The Committee on Standards in Public Life is currently supported by a secretariat of eight Civil Service posts. The Civil Service Code and the Cabinet Office Management Code place restrictions on the political activity, at local and national level, of civil servants and require the confidential disclosure of conflicts of interest to senior managers. Wider disclosure of such information would infringe individuals' privacy. There are no restrictions on membership by civil servants of political parties, and this information is not therefore collected.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Mancroft: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether there is a register of interests of members of the Committee on Standards in Public Life; and, if not, whether they have plans to institute such a Register.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: A register of interests of members of the Committee on Standards in Public Life is maintained in accordance with the committee's code of practice. A copy of the register and of the code of practice can be obtained from the committee and is also published on the committee's website at www.public-standards.gov.uk.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Mancroft: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many staff have been attached to the Committee on Standards in Public Life; and what has been its annual budget for each year since it has been established.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The Committee on Standards in Public Life is currently supported by a secretariat of eight Civil Service posts. Details of members in post have been included in each of the committee's reports and in its annual reports. The committee's expenditure for 1998-99 was £676,358. Information for earlier years is published in the Committee on Standards in Public Life Annual Reports 1994-98. Copies of the reports are available in the Library. The 1999 annual report will be published in the summer and will include details of expenditure in the last financial year. The committee's annual budget for 2000-01 is £535,000.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Mancroft: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any members of the Committee on Standards in Public Life have made any political donations over the last 10 years or have shareholdings in companies that have made such donations.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: Members of the Committee on Standards in Public Life are not required to record details of donations they or companies in which they have shareholdings have made to political organisations or other institutions.
	The committee's code of practice makes clear the need to be open about any potential or perceived conflicts of interest and provides a mechanism for dealing with such situations if they arise.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Dean of Harptree: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When each of the current members of the Committee on Standards in Public Life was appointed; for what term; and whether they receive any payment from public funds.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: Members of the Committee on Standards in Public Life are generally appointed for terms of three years, with the possibility of one re-appointment.
	The table below gives details of the current membership of the committee along with the term of the appointment.
	
		
			   Appointed Term Ends 
			 Lord Neill of  Bladen, QC Chairman 10 November 1997 31 October 2000 
			 Sir Clifford  Boulton Member 1 October 1994* 31 October 2000 
			 Professor  Alice Brown Member 18 November 1998 31 October 2001 
			 Sir Anthony  Cleaver Member 1 January 1998 31 December 2000 
			 Lord  Goodhart Member 11 November 1997 31 October 2000 
			 Frances  Heaton Member 1 January 1998 31 December 2000 
			 Rt. Hon John  MacGregor,  OBE, MP Member 11 November 1997 31 October 2000 
			 Rt. Hon Lord  Shore of  Stepney Member 1 October 1994* 31 October 2000 
			 Sir William  Utting Member 1 October 1994* 31 October 2000 
			 Ann Abraham Member 17 January 2000 31 December 2002 
		
	
	* These members were re-appointed on 1 November 1997 for a second three-year term.
	Members of the Committee on Standards in Public Life who do not already receive a salary from public funds may claim £180 for each day they work on committee business. The chairman may claim £500 per day. All members are reimbursed for actual expenses incurred.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Dean of Harptree: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether members of the Committee on Standards in Public Life are placed under any restrictions to (a) their employment; (b) acceptance of honours; (c) election to the House of Commons; and (d) elevation to membership of the House of Lords, while they are serving on the committee or for any period after their term ends.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: Members of the Committee on Standards in Public Life are bound by its code of practice. This sets out the restrictions on political activity (including any paid office in a political party) that members, with the exception of the three political nominees, may engage in. Members are under a duty not to misuse information gained in the course of their public service for personal gain. There are no other restrictions on the acceptance of employment or on acceptance of honours or elevation to the House of Lords. However, Members of the House of Lords are guided in their conduct in the House by the statement made in the House by Lord Addison on 21 March 1951.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Dean of Harptree: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have any plans to place the Committee on Standards in Public Life on a statutory basis.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: There are no such plans at present.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Dean of Harptree: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	To whom the Committee on Standards in Public Life is accountable for the proper and effective conduct of its duties.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The committee is accountable to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister is accountable to Parliament for the conduct of the committee.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Dean of Harptree: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life last met the Prime Minister; and whether he has discussed with him his proposed inquiry into standards of conduct in the House of Lords.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The Prime Minister and the chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life meet from time to time to discuss a number of issues. They last met on 10 January this year when the noble Lord, Lord Neill, presented the Prime Minister with his committee's sixth report. During the meeting the noble Lord, Lord Neill, discussed with the Prime Minister options for the committee's future work programme along with other issues.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Dean of Harptree: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many staff are attached to the Committee on Standards in Public Life; what are their current salary bands; and what is the current annual budget of the committee.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The Committee's budget for the year 2000-01 is £535,000, which includes £310,000 staff costs. There are eight Civil Service posts attached to the Committee on Standards in Public Life. The table below gives the salary bands of the current posts.
	
		
			 £42,755 to £30,750 to £20,000 to £12,820 to £10,500 to 
			 £67,163 £47,150 £30,750 £17,425 £14,350 
			 Two staff One staff One staff Three staff One staff 
			 members member member members member

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many representations were received by the Committee on Standards in Public Life expressing concern about the effectiveness of the register of interests of peers established under the Griffiths report; and how many of those representations came from (a) Members of the House of Lords; (b) Members of Parliament; (c) journalists; (d) political parties; and (e) members of the public.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The committee makes publicly available all evidence received and summary information on written representations. Since its inception in 1994 the committee has received ad hoc representations on a range of issues, including issues relating to the House of Lords. But to extract and compile the information in the form requested would entail excessive cost.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life informed (a) the Leader of the House; (b) the Leader of the Opposition; (c) the Leader of the Liberal Democrat Peers; (d) the Convenor of the Cross-Bench Peers; and (e) the Prime Minister of his intention to conduct an inquiry into the House of Lords.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The noble Lord, Lord Neill, met the Prime Minister on 10 January to present his committee's sixth report. During the meeting other issues were also discussed, including options for the committee's future work programme. The noble Lord, Lord Neill, suggested a review of standards of conduct in the House of Lords as a possible area for its next study. He wrote to me as the Leader of the House on 22 February informing me of his intention to conduct an inquiry into the House of Lords. He informed the Leader of the Opposition, the Leader of the Liberal Democrat Peers and the Convenor of the Cross-Bench Peers by letter on 8 March.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many members of staff of the Committee on Standards in Public Life have been seconded from Civil Service departments; and from what departments they have been seconded.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The Committee on Standards in Public Life is provided by the Cabinet Office with a secretariat of eight civil service posts. Currently two staff are on loan from the Lord Chancellor's Department and one from the Inland Revenue.

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any members of staff of the Committee on Standards in Public Life have made political donations over the last 10 years.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: Civil servants are not required to inform the Government of any political donations they make as private individuals.

Scottish Adjacent Waters Boundaries Order

Lord Selkirk of Douglas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which Secretaries of State were involved in the decision to remove some 5,000 square miles off the east coast of Scotland from the territorial jurisdiction of the Scottish courts by means of the Scottish Adjacent Waters Boundaries Order 1999 (S.I. 1999/1126) laid before the House in draft on 8 March 1999.

Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale: Information about internal ministerial exchanges is not normally disclosed under exemption 2 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.